- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 09:44:01 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- CC: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
On 5/10/2012 4:04 AM, Larry Masinter wrote: > I think in general that an extensibility method needs a credible > deployment method. +1. This was one of the concerns I raised about XML namespaces in my 2009 TPAC talk on Distributed Extensibility [1]. The good news about namespaces is that anyone can get a namespace, and use it to deploy experimental markup in languages like XML. The bad news is that if some of those exerimental features start getting popular, then you find that they're already deployed with a (fully qualified) name that's likely to be inappropriate for widespread use. E.g. if I invent an experimental extension to (X)HTML and deploy it in "my own" namespace, then it's clumsy to redploy the same feature in the HTML namespace if one ever decides to make it part of the base standard. I agree, for CSS, Florian's proposal looks promising. Noah [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2009Nov/att-0004/DecentrailzedExtensibilityandHTML_v9fixed.pdf
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 13:43:00 UTC